alea-institute/kl3m-data-sample-004-shuffled huggingface dataset:
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

DARIUS GAINES,

Petitioner,

v.

DARRELL G. ADAMS, WARDEN, et al.,

Respondent.

CIV S-04-0018 FCD GGH P

ORDER

This Court hereby grants Respondent’s requests for an additional ten (10) days to

obtain the records or declaration, and a corresponding additional ten (10) days for simultaneous

post-evidentiary hearing briefing.

IT IS SO ORDERED:

Dated: 8/30/05

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

 ____________________________________

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

ga18.eot

Case 2:04-cv-00018-FCD-GGH Document 41 Filed 08/30/05 Page 1 of 1
UNPUBLISHED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT No. 07-6687
CARLTON L. CHANEY, Petitioner - Appellant, versus TERRY O’BRIEN, Warden, U.S. Penitentiary Lee County, Respondent - Appellee. Appeal from the United States District Court for the Western District of Virginia, at Roanoke. Jackson L. Kiser, Senior District Judge. (7:07-cv-00121-jlk) Submitted: September 13, 2007 Decided: September 18, 2007 Before GREGORY and DUNCAN, Circuit Judges, and WILKINS, Senior Circuit Judge. Affirmed by unpublished per curiam opinion. Carlton L. Chaney, Appellant Pro Se. Unpublished opinions are not binding precedent in this circuit.- 2 - PER CURIAM: Carlton L. Chaney, a federal prisoner, appeals the district court’s order denying relief on his 28 U.S.C. § 2241 (2000) petition. We have reviewed the record and find no reversible error. Accordingly, we affirm for the reasons stated by the district court. Chaney v. O’Brien , No. 7:07-cv-00121-jlk (W.D. Va. Apr. 23, 2007). We dispense with oral argument because the facts and legal contentions are adequately presented in the materials before the court and argument would not aid the decisional process.

AFFIRMED
No. P68/277.

protests 66/11545, etc. (New York).

No. P68/278.

protests 67/1101, etc. (New York).

#### Gitkin Co. *v.*United States, Gitkin Co. *v.*United States,

Rao, C. J.

In accordance with stipulation of coimsel that the items of merchandise marked “A” covered by the foregoing protests consist of louvered doors similar in all material respects to those the subject of *B. A. McKenzie & Co., Inc.*v. *United States*(58 Cust. Ct. 460, C.D. 3020) and that the items marked “B” consist of folding doors similar in all material respects to those the subject of *Gitkin Co.*v. *United States*(58 Cust. Ct. 383, C.D. 2997), the claim of the plaintiff was sustained.
No. 47819.

#### Protests 8669-K, etc., of Anco Import Corp. (New York).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the articles in question are in imitation of precious or semiprecious stones composed wholly or in chief value of glass, similar in all material respects to the merchandise covered by Abstract 47109, and in view of the further stipulation that they are not composed in any part of synthetic resin or ivory, that they do not imitate pearls, and are not imitation pearl beads, the merchandise was held dutiable at 25 percent under paragraph 1503 by virtue of T. D. 49458, as claimed.
1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA

STEVEN ANTHONY GUZMAN, 

Petitioner, No. CIV S-04-0700 FCD GGH P

vs.

A. LAMARQUE, Warden, 

Respondent. ORDER

 /

On February 15, 2006, respondent filed a second request for an extension of time

to file a response to the second amended petition for writ of habeas corpus. Respondent failed

both to file a proposed order in .pdf format and to email a proposed order in wordprocessing

format, thus not complying with the local rules. The court will not consider a request that is not

in compliance with E. D. Local Rule 5-137(b). 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

DATED: 3/1/06

/s/ Gregory G. Hollows

GREGORY G. HOLLOWS

UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

GGH:009

guzm0700.lc

Case 2:04-cv-00700-FCD-GGH Document 19 Filed 03/01/06 Page 1 of 1
# sec4_attribtable_2024

&"Arial,Bold"&10Bulletin No. 2023-02	&"Arial,Bold"&9Draft	&"Arial,Bold"&10IRC Handout
#### UNITED STATES of America, Plaintiff-Appellee, v. O’Rane M. CORNISH, Sr., Defendant-Appellant.

No. 01-5392.

United States Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit.

June 15, 2001.

Before RYAN and COLE, Circuit Judges; MARBLEY, District Judge.*

*

 The Honorable Algenon L. Marbley, United States District Judge for the Southern District of Ohio, sitting by designation.

On February 8, 2001, the defendant was found guilty by a jury of one count of wire fraud, seven counts of money laundering, one count of bank fraud, and one count of making false statements in connection with a bank loan. His sentencing is currently scheduled for June 29, 2001. The defendant appeals the February 21 order requiring that he be detained pending sentencing. The government argues that the court should affirm the ruling of the district court. The panel is in unanimous agreement that oral argument is not necessary because the facts and legal arguments are adequately presented in the material before the court. *See*Fed. R.App. P. 9(a) and 34(a)

Release or detention pending sentencing is governed by 18 U.S.C. § 3143(a). The statute provides that pending the imposition of a sentence, a defendant shall be detained “unless the judicial officer finds by clear and convincing evidence that the person is not likely to flee or pose a danger to the safety of any other person or the community if released” on bond or on other conditions pursuant to § 3142(b) or (c). *See United States v. Vance,*851 F.2d 166, 168 (6th Cir.), *cert. denied,*488 U.S. 893, 109 S.Ct. 231, 102 L.Ed.2d 220 (1988). The district court’s factual findings are reviewed by this court for clear error. Legal conclusions and mixed questions of law and fact are reviewed de novo. *Id.*at 170; *see United States v. Hazime,*762 F.2d 34, 37 (6th Cir.1985).

At the detention hearing, the trial judge found that the defendant was not truthful with either the court or Pretrial Services. *364The judge concluded that she “cannot find by clear and convincing evidence that he is unlikely to flee given the fact that electronic monitoring cannot work.” The defendant has not met his burden of demonstrating that this conclusion was in error. *See United States v. Welsand,*998 F.2d 1366, 1367 (8th Cir.1993) (affirming a detention order finding the defendant a risk of flight based on a violation of a prior condition of release); *United States v. Cas-tiello,*878 F.2d 554, 555-56 (1st Cir.1989) (affirming a detention order finding the defendant a risk of flight).

The February 21 detention order is hereby AFFIRMED.
IN THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

MIDDLE DISTRICT

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA,

Respondent

v.

OMAR ALI ROLLIE,

Petitioner :

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

:

: No. 341 MAL 2018

Petition for Allowance of Appeal from

the Order of the Superior Court

ORDER

PER CURIAM

AND NOW , this 3rd day of December, 2018

, the Petition for Allowance of Appeal

is DENIED

.
Exhibit 99.2

Certification of the Chief Financial Officer  Pursuant to 18 U.S.C. Section 1350,  As Adopted Pursuant to Section 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002

In connection with the Annual Report of International Multifoods Corporation (the "Company") on Form 10-K for the fiscal year ended
March 1, 2003 as filed with the Securities and Exchange Commission on the date hereof (the "Report"), John E. Byom, Senior Vice President, Finance and Chief Financial Officer of the Company,
hereby certifies, pursuant to 18 U.S.C. § 1350, as adopted pursuant to § 906 of the Sarbanes-Oxley Act of 2002, that:



| |  | /s/ John E. ByomJohn E. Byom
Senior Vice President, Finance & Chief Financial Officer
| |  | -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Date:
May12, 2003

A
signed original of this written statement required by Section 906 has been provided to International Multifoods Corporation and will be retained by International Multifoods Corporation and
furnished to the Securities and Exchange Commission or its staff upon request.

---

QuickLinks
No. 55215.

#### Samuel Shapiro *v.*United States,

protests 143893-K (A) and 143893-K (B) (New York).

Opinion by

Mollison, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of reptile skins the same in -all material respects as those passed upon in *Fleming-Joffe, Ltd.*v. *United States*(25 Cust. Ct. 56, C. D. 1263), the claim for free entry under paragraph 1765 was sustained. Protest 143893-K (A), having been abandoned insofar as it relates to entries 720794, 725974, 725973, 701480, and 760940, was overruled as to said entries.
No. 57976.

protests 190922-K, etc. (Boston).

#### Talbot-Mottla, Inc. *v.*United States,

Opinion by

Oliver, C. J.

It was stipulated that for duty purposes the clean content of the wool in question was determined in accordance with the instructions contained in T. D. 53159. Said T. D. 53159 was issued following the decision in *Fred Whitaker Company, Inc.*v. *United States*(27 Cust. Ct. 168, C. D. 1365), affirmed in *United States*v. *Fred Whitaker Company, Inc.*(40 C. C. P. A. 19, *447C. A. D. 492), wherein the statutory language, clean content of wool, as used in paragraph 1102 (b), was construed to mean the product commercially usable as wool and from which all the weight of grease and foreign material has been removed, including the wool fibers which are unavoidably and irrevocably lost as a result of commercially applied cleaning processes. Accordingly, the wool in question was held dutiable at the rate applied by the collector on the basis of the percentages of clean content as set forth in the column headed “Clean Content under T. D. 53159” in the schedule attached to and made a part of the decision in this case.
EXHIBIT 21

# LIST OF SUBSIDIARIESOFFURNITURE BRANDS
INTERNATIONAL, INC.

|                                           |                
|------------------------------------------ | ---------------
|                                           |                
|                                           |                
|                                           | Jurisdiction of
|Name of Subsidiary                         | Incorporation  
|                                           |                
|                                           |                
|                                           |                
|                                           |                
|                                           |                
|Action Transport, Inc.                     | Delaware       
|Broyhill Furniture Industries, Inc.        | North Carolina 
|Broyhill Transport, Inc.                   | North Carolina 
|Classic Design Furnishings, Inc.           | Virginia       
|Decorative Hardware Solutions (L) Bhd      | Malaysia       
|D-H Retail Space, Inc.                     | Delaware       
|Drexel Heritage Furniture Industries, Inc. | Delaware       
|Fayette Enterprises, Inc.                  | Mississippi    
|Furniture Brands Export Co., Ltd.          | Barbados       
|HDM Furniture Industries, Inc.             | Delaware       
|Henredon Furniture Industries, Inc.        | Delaware       
|Henredon Transportation Company            | North Carolina 
|Henredon Designer Showrooms, Inc.          | Delaware       
|Lane Furniture Industries, Inc.            | Mississippi    
|Lane Home Furnishings Retail, Inc.         | Delaware       
|Laneventure, Inc.                          | Delaware       
|Maitland-Smith Asia Holdings Limited       | Vanuatu        
|Maitland-Smith Cebu, Inc.                  | Philippines    
|Maitland-Smith Furniture Industries, Inc.  | Delaware       
|Maitland-Smith Home Furnishings, Inc.      | Delaware       
|Maitland-Smith Limited                     | Hong Kong      
|P.T. Maitland-Smith                        | Indonesia      
|Maitland-Smith Export (L) Bhd              | Malaysia       
|The Lane Company, Incorporated             | Virginia       
|Thomasville Furniture Industries, Inc.     | Delaware       
|Thomasville Home Furnishings, Inc.         | Delaware       
|                                          

Lane
Furniture Industries, Inc. also does business as Laneventure.

Thomasville
Furniture Industries, Inc. also does business as The Pearson Company, Hickory Business
Furniture, Founders and Creative Interiors.  Henredon Furniture Industries, Inc. also does
business as Hickory Chair Company.
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

1

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

View Previously Generated Historical Reports

To view previously generated historical reports, complete the following steps:

1. From the Reports tab, select Historical Reports and click View Previously Generated 

Reports. The View Previously Generated Reports page appears as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1: View Previously Generated Reports

2. Select one of the reports to download and under the Download column, click 

Download. The File Download dialog box appears.

• Once the Comma Separated Values (CSV) file is downloaded, it can be opened 

using Excel or Notepad.

• Previously generated reports are available for 30 days. Duplicate report requests 

based on identical report parameters cannot be made within the same 7-day period; 

however, after 7 days a duplicate report request can be submitted. Report requests 

are user specific and are not viewable by other users.

• The CIRA CSV Historical Report page is configured to download a maximum of 31 

days of search results. This range parameter applies when a user searches using 

Received Date, Check Capture Date, Settlement Date or Return Settlement 

Date. The system will display an error message to you when searching for results 

beyond the configured range.

3. Click Open, Save, or Cancel.

Application Tips
Bureau of the Fiscal Service

2

OTCnet Printable Job Aid

• Click Open and the file content displays.

• Click Save and choose the location for saving the file. 

• Click Cancel and the dialog box closes. No data is saved.

• Click Cancel again to return to the OTCnet Home Page. No data is saved.

Additional Button
Before the Third Division,

April 17, 1961

No. 65468.

#### Justin Tharaud Son, Inc., and J. J. Murphy & Co. et al. *v.*United States,

protests 180931-K, etc. (New York).

Opinion by

Johnson, J.

In accordance with stipulation of counsel that the merchandise consists of Rockingham earthenware similar in all material respects to that the subject of *Justin Tharaud & Son, Inc., et al.*v. *United States*(44 Cust. Ct. 216, C.D. 2177), the merchandise was held dutiable as follows: (a) As to all items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on and after January 1, 1948, and prior to September 10, 1955, at 20 cents per dozen articles, but not less than 7% percent nor more than 25 percent ad valorem, under paragraph 210, as modified by the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 51802) ; and (b) as to all items entered, or withdrawn from warehouse, for consumption on and after September 10, 1955, at 6% percent, if valued at $1.50 or more per dozen articles, under paragraph 210, as modified by the Japanese Protocol to the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (T.D. 53865), supplemented by Presidential proclamation (T.D. 53877).
Case No. 8,998.

#### MALTBY et al. v. BOBO.

[14 Blatchf. 53; 2 Ban. & A. 459.]1

Circuit Court, S. D. New York.

Nov. 18, 1876.

Patents — Infringement—Injunction—No Interest.

The fact that a defendant who has sold an article which infringes on a patent, sold it on behalf of its owner, and had no interest in it, or in its sale, is no ground for refusing to grant an injunction against him.

[Cited in Steiger v. Heidelberger. 4 Fed. 458; Estes v. Worthington, 30 Fed. 465; Armstrong v. Savannah Soap Works, 53 Fed. 126.]

[This was a bill by Douglass F. Maltby and others against Angus L. Bobo for an injunction to restrain certain infringements.]

Francis Forbes, for plaintiffs.

Andrew J. Todd, for defendant.

JOHNSON, Circuit Judge.

The plaintiffs' bill of complaint contains all the averments of fact to make out their right and the infringement thereof by the defendant. The facts are verified by the usual oath. The *564right of the plaintiffs is further supported by affidavit, showing that the plaintiffs have obtained against another defendant, in this court, an interlocutory injunction, and that, after some litigation, defendant submitted to a decree. Upon this state of the case an injunction is moved for. The defendant presents no denial of any of the alleged facts, by affidavit or otherwise, but only alleges, by way of plea, that, in selling the nail pullers mentioned in the bill, he was acting as salesman for one Dickerman, the owner of the nail-pullers, and that he had no interest in the nail-pullers, or in the sale of them, except as the employee of Dickerman, to dispose of the same. The plea has been set down for argument, but has not yet been heard; but I do not understand, that any absolute rule of practice prevents the granting of an injunction in such a case. It is, of course, necessary to look at the sufficiency of the plea, which I regard as presenting no defence to the bill. A wrong-doer cannot set up that he is doing wrong on account of a third person, as a bar to his own responsibility. The principal, also, may be liable, if the injured party elects to look to him; but the person who is actually doing the wrong cannot escape liability. Inasmuch. therefore, as the case made by the bill is wholly undefended, and as the plea states the fact which is, in law, an infringement, an injunction must be granted.
STATE OF LOUISIANA

ALAN BRUMFIELD

VERSUS

LOUISIANA DEPARTMENT OF

PUBLIC SAFETY AND

CORRECTIONS

NO. 2023 CW 0374

JULY 28, 2023

In Re: Alan Brumfield, applying for supervisory writs, 19th

Judicial District Court, Parish of East Baton Rouge, 

No. 714798. 

BEFORE: HOLDRIDGE, CHUTZ, AND PENZATO, JJ. 

WRIT DENIED. Relator, Alan Brumfield, filed with this

court a motion to compel the Department of Public Safety and

Corrections to comply with the prior order of this court in

Brumfield v. Louisiana Dep' t of Pub. Safety & Corr., 2022- 0869

La. App. 1st Cir. 12/ 22/ 22), 358 So. 3d 70, 76. This court is a

court of review, not first impression. Relator must file his

motion and seek relief with the district court. 

GH

WRC

ARP

COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST CIRCUIT

DEPUTY CLERK OF COURT

FOR THE COURT
No. 50948.

#### Protests 61821-K, etc., of Louis Wolf & Co., Inc. (Seattle).

Opinion by

Oliver, P. J.

Following the authorities cited in Abstract 15400 the court dismissed the protests.
118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3946 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States Postal Service 

located at 1106 Main Street in Bastrop, Texas, as the 

‘‘Sergeant Major Billy D. Waugh Post Office’’. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 
2 

†S 3946 ES

1 SECTION 1. SERGEANT MAJOR BILLY D. WAUGH POST OF2 FICE. 

3 (a) DESIGNATION.—The facility of the United States 

4 Postal Service located at 1106 Main Street in Bastrop, 

5 Texas, shall be known and designated as the ‘‘Sergeant 

6 Major Billy D. Waugh Post Office’’. 

7 (b) REFERENCES.—Any reference in a law, map, reg8 ulation, document, paper, or other record of the United 

9 States to the facility referred to in subsection (a) shall 

10 be deemed to be a reference to the ‘‘Sergeant Major Billy 

11 D. Waugh Post Office’’. 

Passed the Senate November 19, 2024. 

Attest: 

Secretary. 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3946 

AN ACT 

To designate the facility of the United States PostWaugh Post Office’’. Bastrop, Texas, as the ‘‘Sergeant Major Billy D. al Service located at 1106 Main Street in
Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 1 of 9

Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 2 of 9

Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 3 of 9

Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 4 of 9

Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 5 of 9

Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 6 of 9

Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 7 of 9

Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 8 of 9

Case 2:02-cv-02761-RBS     Document 6-3      Filed 10/11/2002     Page 9 of 9
II 

118TH CONGRESS 

2D SESSION S. 3887 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to increase the penalty for rioting. 

IN THE SENATE OF THE UNITED STATES 

MARCH 6, 2024 

Mr. COTTON introduced the following bill; which was read twice and referred 

to the Committee on the Judiciary 

A BILL 

To amend title 18, United States Code, to increase the 

penalty for rioting. 

1 Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representa2 tives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, 

3 SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE. 

4 This Act may be cited as the ‘‘Stop Pro-Terrorist 

5 Riots Now Act’’. 

6 SEC. 2. RIOTS. 

7 Section 2101 of title 18, United States Code, is 

8 amended— 

9 (1) in subsection (a), in the matter preceding 

10 subsection (b)— 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
2 

•S 3887 IS

1 (A) by striking ‘‘subparagraph (A), (B), 

2 (C), or (D) of this paragraph—’’ and inserting 

3 ‘‘paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) of this sub4 section—’’; 

5 (B) by inserting ‘‘less than one year if the 

6 defendant, in carrying out an activity described 

7 in this subsection, committed an act of violence 

8 or aided or abetted any other person in commit9 ting an act of violence, nor’’ before ‘‘more’’; and 

10 (C) by striking ‘‘five’’ and inserting ‘‘ten’’; 

11 and 

12 (2) in subsection (b), by striking ‘‘subparagraph 

13 (A), (B), (C), or (D) of paragraph (1) of subsection 

14 (a)’’ and inserting ‘‘paragraph (1), (2), (3), or (4) 

15 of subsection (a)’’. 

Æ 


ssavage on LAPJG3WLY3PROD with BILLS
Exhibit 21



                              List of Subsidiaries
                                       Of
                      Furniture Brands International, Inc.




                                                               Jurisdiction of
    Name of Subsidiary                                         Incorporation
    ------------------                                         ---------------

Action Transport, Inc.                                           Delaware

Action Industries, Inc.                                          Mississippi

Broyhill Furniture Industries, Inc.                              North Carolina

Broyhill Transport, Inc.                                         North Carolina

Fayette Enterprises, Inc.                                        Mississippi

Lane Advertising, Inc.                                           Virginia

Lane Furniture Industries, Inc.                                  Delaware

The Lane Company, Incorporated                                   Virginia

Thomasville Furniture Industries, Inc.                           Delaware

Thomasville Furniture Latin America, S.A.                        Panama

Thomasville Home Furnishings, Inc.                               Delaware

Furniture Brands Export Co., Ltd.                                Barbados
# Sheet1

&"Arial,Bold"Part 2SUPPLEMENT &"Arial,Regular"	&"Arial,Bold"&16&KFF0000DRAFT	&"Arial,Bold"Fiscal Year 2019 ReportingSection VII &"Arial,Regular" 

&"Arial,Bold"Bulletin No. 2019-02	&"Arial,Bold"&KFF0000DRAFT&K000000 VII VDR - &P	&"Arial,Bold"IRC Handout 12/4/18